Equipment Singapore Bound - Lens Shopping list

Guys,

I'm off to Singapore in a couple of weeks time, and one of the tings I'd like to do whilst I'm out there is to pick up some lenses for D80 I got last year (whilst in Singapore, oddly enough )

I'm after a longer zoom, with VR, so I think I'm all set to get the 70-300mm Nikon. I'll be using it for motorsport pics (possibly rugby pics as well) and general cute animal wildlife shots. Anybody got any experience with this lens?

I'm also after a super wide, but I'm torn between between the Tokina 12-24mm & the Sigma 10-20mm. I've heard that the Tokina has better build quality, but the Sigma is a little wider. Again, any comments on the merits of each would be cool.

Ta,

GOO

 

I think you'll be happy with the 70-300. There really isn't anything to gripe about. The build and aperture range is good for the price. It's AF-S and IF and VR. IIRC, there is a big push to move this lens, so the pricing right now is pretty good. Be sure to check all the big US retailers to see what pricing is, and use that as a starting guide, since the US is a pretty discounted market.

 

Thanks JJ

Anybody like to wade in to the wide-angle question?

I'm open to suggestions an alternate choices as well. And if you own the lenses, post pics that you shot with them - it'll be a be a visual aid to help the finance officer (Hello, dear! ) sign off on purchase orders.

 

My friend Henry has the Sigma 10-20 and he says it's a great lens. However, it's worth noting Sigma's occasionally dodgy quality. Tokina overall makes a better product (being a Pentax company). If I were deciding between those, I think I'd rather have the Tokina - but please bear in mind that this is not a truly informed opinion on the specific lens.

In light of that, I'll see if I can grab a couple of his pics to put up here for you on the Sigma. I used it out in Vegas on his D80, and it was "alright" to me. I can't help but feel a little nitpicky on it, but the build did not feel solid.

 

There's also a Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 that you may want to consider. I haven't used one, and obviously it doesn't have the range of either of the others, but it's also a stop faster with a fixed aperture.

 

The 70-300 is a great lens, but like most of its counterparts it seems to fall off a bit towards the long end (250mm+), and the fact that its a 4.5-5.6 variable aperture really cripples it as a sports lens in relative low light. In which case if your planning on using it for high speed sports be sure to keep in mind that you must have good lighting to do so. If this seems like it will limit your ability to capture such images, you may want to take a look at the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 and or the Tamron variant (although AF isn't great on either...they are both still f/2.8 tele-zooms on a budget). As for your UWA quarry, A friend who I shoot along side of uses Nikon and owns a 10-20, which is her favorite lens in her kit. You cannot go wrong with either the Sigma 10-20 or the Tokina 12-24. As for the Tokina 11-16, I was actually planning on picking it up as my UWA, but since it is confined to crop bodies I decided on the Canon 16-35 instead (which I just ordered). If you can handle the limited zoom range, it is a highly recommended lens and beats the competition (Canon 10-22, Sigma 10-20, Tokina 12-24) in sharpness at all comparable FL's. OTOH, if you do not plan to shoot in low light, you are likely better off saving a bit of money and go with either the 12-24 or 10-20 for the longer range, and better flare and Vignetting resistance. In the end you really can't go wrong...unless of course you can afford the Nikkor 12-24

 

As Da Dego said... I love the 10-20mm... I would never travel anywhere with out it! While in Europe it stayed on my camera most of the time. The 10mm is amazing!!! there is nothing like it (ya ya, unless you go full frame). Contrast, colour and sharpness is amazing on this guy, I would highly recommend it.










Anyways... you get the picture

 

double post

 

Thanks Henry - Long time no post!

And thanks to everyone else's opinions. More pics though please

 

Ya, it's been a while anyways, stop asking and get the Sigma, heh

 

Hi all - thanks for the advice. I'm still in warm, humid Singapore, but I managed to go shopping early in the trip - so I've bagged the Sigma UWA on Henry's advice and the Nikon 70-300mm VR I've been after for a while.

The Sigma is just so damn wide! As for doubts about the build quality, I'd say it's on a par with both the Nikons. The 300mm was great at getting the cute animal photos I wanted, once I'd worked out which VR setting to use.

10-20mm Sigma:
Eating Durian
Sunset in Tioman

Nikon 70-300mm VR:
Jurassic Park
Sail Boat
Butterfly
Monkey See
Monkey Do
Monkey Bored

The VR is good - it can't compensate for massive amounts of movement, but it does get rid of all those little tremors that you get. In fact I was so impressed by the anti-shake VR system (maybe it's just the geek photography noob in me), I happened to let the 16-85mm Nikon VR fall into the shopping cart yesterday whilst I was browsing at Funan It Mall. I'll just have to hide the bill from Mrs GOO...

Not had much of a chance to play with it, but here's a nice shot from the tests I did yesterday. Not much chance of playing today though, as the rain is currently taking lumps out of the road...

Nikon 16-85mm VR:
Flowers in the Garden

 

I love Singapore, It's probably my favorite city.

 

It looks to me like your 70-300 is either not focusing correctly or that you're trying to have the VR do some magic that it can't... The shots from it look either quite soft and blurred. So I decided to look at the Exif for the ones I noticed the most: The sailboat is definitely out of focus as you shot this at 1/800 but the Lizard on the other hand... Even though you have VR you shouldn't try to shoot at 1/50 @ 300mm unless you have something to support the camera.
With VR I would shoot and feel safe with 1/50 at no higher than 55mm. The closer you zoom the shorter shutter time you need. Now I don't have any links at hand but I think some of the others here might be able to add that to show how to calculate shutter time in regards to focal length. There are some simple math tricks that one can use for guidelines but I forgot lol Something like x mm = x thousand of a second decrease in shutter time.
The butterfly is really the best of the bunch. It's a very nice picture and focus is pretty much dead on. (still looks a tiny but soft though but nothing to worry about). If you crop it a little to get rid of the yellow leaf and a little of the plant it will be a smashing shot. (imo of course )
And congrats on getting a 70-300. It's very nice to be able to go as close as 300mm

The 16-85 looks smashing though! From the looks of that one shot in non-optimal conditions it looks to have performed very well indeed. Focusing spot on and tack sharp. Oh and 16-85 is a helluva sweet zoom area. Congrats on the buy

 

Wide angle - Shutter speed= 1/focal length.

Long lenses - Shutter speed=1.5/focal length. <- that's non VR. With VR you might get away with 1/focal length.

 

Plus you have to factor in the effective focal length from the crop factor. so x1.6 or x1.3 on Canon bodies, I think x1.5 on most Nikons.

I think you've got the formula backwards though... you want faster on the longer lenses, not slower. 1/(1.5*FL) I think is what you were going for

 

Thanks for the advice. I'm still very much of a beginner in all of this so a lot of the settings your seeing are from the pre-programmed settings on the camera. I've probably selected the wrong one for the job!

 

You have a nice DSLR so don't be afraid of using the more manual settings instead. These are what help you photograph the beauty that you see The auto ones are meant for when your mom or next-of-kin borrows the camera

 

http://kenrockwell.com/nikon/70-300-vr.htm#vr
Check out his VR tests, the lens seems quite capable of going to 1/50 and below and still getting a modicum of sharp shots.

Nice pictures, and definitely nice lenses. I hope you keep on turning out high-quality images.

 

right.

 

Now I's don't not understand them there fancy pants words (modicum) but I's can read 'n' the man says:

So yes you may shoot at 1/50 (or even 1/20) @300 and get fine results with 50% of the shots. And if you have a studio setup that's mighty fine. But if you're on holiday and you want that single shot of a beautiful boat in the sunset to be sharp... well... precautionary measures.
I don't know what mr. Ken Rockwell has to say about the IS in my 70-300 but I'll have to stand exceptionally still to catch something tack sharp at 1/50 and below @ 300mm.

What's to be learned is either: A: Take a lot of shots and cross your fingers. Or B: Use simple math as a guideline and then after a while apply C: Know your lens and how still you can hold it with and without VR.
Or D: ABC all together. Why not take multiple shots and compositions? It's digital so it's not going to cost you anything. Delete all but the best one or two when you see them full size on the computer. Oh and this way you may skip crossing your fingers (at least a little )